You know it and I know it too, that B.O. got into the WH becaue of voters’ digust about GWB, the economy, financial crisis, etc….

And GOP got the house due to a small fraction fo the voters’ (tea party) disgust about B.O., his talks about cutting 95% of people’s tax while raising it for the top 2% or 5%, and the ever business-unfriendly health care bill, etc.

The tea party would have never got its momentum had B.O. took less populist approach.

Of course, you are wise to know that populism is left (far left) and is BAD for the economy (short and long term).

If you take a look the economic history of Latin America, you will see that populism is the main reason that they failed to unlease that region’s potential compared to the Asian Tigers.

- kept the bush tax cuts and added on a payroll tax cut
- continued the iraq and afgan wars and even kept Bush’s defense secretary
- enacted a health care overall that was basically a copy of what a republican governor had already done and also took from many republican ideas from the 90s (individual mandate)
- reduced the number of total government workers
- increased spending on border security

bchadwick Wrote:
——————————————————-
> I don’t know where “the center” is anymore. And I
> don’t understand where the right starts asserting
> that Obama is governing from the “far left.”
>
> The right seems to define the center as GWB, and
> anything to the left of that as “extreme left.”

I think this video is a good start for defining the political parties of this country.

naturallight Wrote:
——————————————————-
> On a policy basis, the current president has
>
> - kept the bush tax cuts and added on a payroll
> tax cut
> - continued the iraq and afgan wars and even kept
> Bush’s defense secretary
> - enacted a health care overall that was basically
> a copy of what a republican governor had already
> done and also took from many republican ideas from
> the 90s (individual mandate)
> - reduced the number of total government workers
> - increased spending on border security
>
> Some liberal.

True to a certain degree.

Yet his populist talks created such a amount of uncertainty that sucks the confidence and visibility of businesses and they are sitting on their hands.

The single most important word in economics is “EXPECTATION”. People make most decsions based on their expections.

If they expect uncertainties, no matter how goods the current state is, they are likely to take less action.

Reagon was such a popular president among left and right, not because he racked up the country’s debt.

Mainly becase he gave Americans a sense of hope. And a strong expectatinon that their better days are ahead of them.

1. not a fan of tea party
2. tea party rose to the national popularity in reaction to B.O.’s left policy
3. In response to natrallight = even though B.O. kept some GWB era policy. His talks/plans is to got the populist route. That scares businesses and investors fundementally.

Question, why aren’t all these clear to you after all these years of study and practice in the investment field?

AlphaSeeker Wrote:
——————————————————-
> True to a certain degree.
>
> Yet his populist talks created such a amount of
> uncertainty that sucks the confidence and
> visibility of businesses and they are sitting on
> their hands.
>
> The single most important word in economics is
> “EXPECTATION”. People make most decsions based on
> their expections.
>
> If they expect uncertainties, no matter how goods
> the current state is, they are likely to take
> less action.
>
> Reagon was such a popular president among left and
> right, not because he racked up the country’s
> debt.
>
> Mainly becase he gave Americans a sense of hope.
> And a strong expectatinon that their better days
> are ahead of them.
>
> Not behind them

Is it the idea that Clinton-era tax rates were not completely un-American?

Or maybe the idea that the middle class got its rear end ripped off by the banking class due to complacency during the boom times and maybe needs to rethink whether complete deregulation has been a benefit to them?

bchadwick Wrote:
——————————————————-
> What do you mean by populism? I mean, how do you
> define it?
>
> Is it jackbooted soldiers marching the streets?
>
> Is it suggesting that the middle class may be
> eroding in the US?
>
> Is it the idea that Clinton-era tax rates were not
> completely un-American?
>
>
> What do you mean by populism?

AlphaSeeker Wrote:
——————————————————-
> ^ Palantir, don’t digress
>
> 1. not a fan of tea party
> 2. tea party rose to the national popularity in
> reaction to B.O.’s left policy
> 3. In response to natrallight = even though B.O.
> kept some GWB era policy. His talks/plans is to
> got the populist route. That scares businesses and
> investors fundementally.
>
> Question, why aren’t all these clear to you after
> all these years of study and practice in the
> investment field?

@alphaseeker

what exactly is this populist route that has business/investors scared ‘fundamentally’?

and please explain what are B.O’s “left policies”. most of us who believes in progressive ideas/policies don’t consider current policies to be liberal ideas.

So today House should pass Boehner’s measure, and on Monday, Senate should reject it after debate. After that happens. Assuming they can put together a joint compromised plan, how are they going to come up with a plan within a day and get it through both chambers of Congress by end of August 2?

Palantir Wrote:
——————————————————-
> So back on topic.
>
>
> So today House should pass Boehner’s measure, and
> on Monday, Senate should reject it after debate.
> After that happens. Assuming they can put together
> a joint compromised plan, how are they going to
> come up with a plan within a day and get it
> through both chambers of Congress by end of August
> 2?

They are scheduled to work over the weekend…

If they need some bills to fill the time while they deal in the backroom, they will debate on Ginger or Mary Ann.

MCalamari Wrote:
——————————————————-
> Palantir Wrote:
> ————————————————–
> —–
> > Now that it’s pointed out that O’s policies are
> pretty centrist
> > and to some extent even conservative
>
> Without going into each individual policy, why is
> it that the political left seems to praise him
> while the political right abhor him on a daily
> basis?
>
> Also, stop with the personal attacks, things like
> “eyeroll” is exactly why congress is in this mess.

Logic doesn’t follow here. I might as well say:

Why is it that racists like the Tea Party, whereas liberals hate them.

bchadwick Wrote:
——————————————————-
> MCalamari Wrote:
> ————————————————–
> —–
> > Palantir Wrote:
> >
> ————————————————–
>
> > —–
> > > Now that it’s pointed out that O’s policies
> are
> > pretty centrist
> > > and to some extent even conservative
> >
> > Without going into each individual policy, why
> is
> > it that the political left seems to praise him
> > while the political right abhor him on a daily
> > basis?
> >
> > Also, stop with the personal attacks, things
> like
> > “eyeroll” is exactly why congress is in this
> mess.
>
>
> Logic doesn’t follow here. I might as well say:
>
> Why is it that racists like the Tea Party, whereas
> liberals hate them.
>
> I have therefore PROVED that the Tea Party is
> racist???

No, but it is strong evidence that the president’s stances and policies (or overall image) appeals to certain groups. We can cherry pick the groups that support each political entity and say that’s what they are, but favor/disfavor of large blocks of the country’s political groups is much more telling information.

Teabaggers are racists dressed up in political clothing. Google Mark Williams, BO monkey pictures, etc. They rebranded, which the RNC is top notch at doing, and to distance themselves from the overspending, CIA agent outing, Justice dept politicizing, EPA, FEMA and SEC castrating, wrong war mongering, 8 years of GWB. With 20% approval ratings, they needed to do something to distance themselves from their mess because even lifelong Republicans were leaving the tent after that chaos.

Then 2010 brought us Sharron Angle, Christine O’Donnell, and Sarah Palin. Who play to the victimized bible thumping loyal and literally threaten the thinking, reasoning establishment of government. Trade a chicken for a doctors visit? Im not a witch? I read all them newspapers? These people shouldnt be allowed to teach elementary school much less hold office.

And Weepy Glenn Beck, whose most recent human moment was comparing the murdered children in Norwegian school massacre to Hitler youth. Good job Teabagger.

Dick Armey, Freedom Works Teabaggers was the House Majority Leader for the Republicans in the 90s. And now this PAC is Teaparty and not Republican?

This is all just a marketing tactic that works so well for the sheeple that make up the American public. Just like if you blame Barney Frank and Chris Dodd for the housing mess, though they had no power to lead their committees until 2007 when everyone agrees the first cracks of the financial crisis were starting to show.

These guys are crazy and their followers are willful ignorants because their political compass was wrecked. So instead of admitting their mistake, they rebrand, reload, reprogram.

Watch Inside Job that won the 2010 Oscar for best documentary to see some real knowledge. Its all about compromise, and this POTUS and Congress are both doing a sh!tty job of getting us anywhere. And anyone stupid enough to call themselves Teaparty need to put on their tinfoil hat and worry about the great Kenyan Conspiracy to install a leftist POTUS who keeps caving to Republican demands on all of his agenda items.